Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Maximilian Frank
dblp:217/8632
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · unresolved
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Security and privacy · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Empirical software engineering · 77% Requirements engineering and software design · 23% | |
| Network and information security
1 paper |
Network security · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Network security › intrusion detection and prevention
intrusion detection |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Maintainable Log Datasets for Evaluation of Intrusion Detection Systems · IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. 2023 |
Empirical software engineering › benchmarking
benchmark dataset |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Maintainable Log Datasets for Evaluation of Intrusion Detection Systems · IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. 2023 |
Requirements engineering and software design
model-driven engineering |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Maintainable Log Datasets for Evaluation of Intrusion Detection Systems · IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
state machine simulation · 1.3model-driven engineering · 1.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Maintainable Log Datasets for Evaluation of Intrusion Detection SystemsabstractIntrusion detection systems (IDS) monitor system logs and network traffic to recognize malicious activities in computer networks. Evaluating and comparing IDSs with respect to their detection accuracies is thereby essential for their selection in specific use-cases. Despite a great need, hardly any labeled intrusion detection datasets are publicly available. As a consequence, evaluations are often carried out on datasets from real infrastructures, where analysts cannot control system parameters or generate a reliable ground truth, or private datasets that prevent reproducibility of results. As a solution, we present a collection of maintainable log datasets collected in a testbed representing a small enterprise. Thereby, we employ extensive state machines to simulate normal user behavior and inject a multi-step attack. For scalable testbed deployment, we use concepts from model-driven engineering that enable automatic generation and labeling of an arbitrary number of datasets that comprise repetitions of attack executions with variations of parameters. In total, we provide 8 datasets containing 20 distinct types of log files, of which we label 8 files for 10 unique attack steps. We publish the labeled log datasets and code for testbed setup and simulation online as open-source to enable others to reproduce and extend our results. Max Landauer, Florian Skopik, Maximilian Frank, Wolfgang Hotwagner, Markus Wurzenberger, Andreas Rauber |
IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. | 3 |